On Mar 15, 2013, at 4:42 PM, Nicholas Leippe <nick at leippe.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Levi Pearson <levipearson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Crackpots aren't marginalized and dismissed because
>> they attack the status quo. They're marginalized because they're
>> wrong, or at least their arguments are flawed to the point of being
>> inadmissible to serious consideration.
>> Yes, there *are* actual crackpots according to your definition.
How can you take seriously a guy who argues that pi is exactly 4? Yeah, string theory is clearly on shaky ground as a science, and there are plenty of real physicists who will tell you that. No need to turn to crackpots. But string theory is an interesting mathematical structure with some explanatory power, and developments in mathematics have often led to new discoveries in physics. Its primary fault is that its predictions beyond what corresponds to already-accepted theory can't be tested in any way we can think of right now, but the fact that it does correspond so well in areas that can be tested lends it some potential credibility.
If you think this dude is the next Galileo, you need to read the bit by Asimov again. Also, you need to either read his stuff more critically, or perhaps have your head examined. He's not just arguing against Greene and co., he's disagreeing with every mathematician and physicist since Euclid!
Seriously, pi is 4? Do you understand that if this guy was actually right, we wouldn't be able to build a proper bicycle, much less a computer or a nuclear reactor.